When I tried it in the past, I kinda didn’t take it seriously because everything was confined to its instance, but now, there’s full-featured global search and proper federation everywhere? Wow, I thought I heard there were some technical obstacles making it very unlikely, but now it’s just there and works great! I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really? I’m not sure how I didn’t notice this sooner. Was it really there for so long? With flairs showing original instance where video comes from and everything?
You must log in or # to comment.
I missed the part where that’s my problem.
spoiler
Sorry I just wanted to say that.
I asked ChatGPT
Why do people bring this up every fucking time?
what do you mean? it’s like being angry that people bring up I googled something
Googling at least until fairly recently meant „I consulted an index of Internet”. It is a means to get to the bit of information.
Asking ChatGPT is like asking a well-behaved parrot in the library and believing every word it says instead of reading the actual book the librarian would point you towards.
I use it instead of search most of the time nowadays. Why? Because it does proceed to google it for me, parse search results, read the pages behind those links, summarize everything from there, present it to me in short condensed form and also provide the links where it got the info from. This feature been here for a while.
It’s all good, Lemmy users are strongly anti-ai and are genuinely learning right now that chatgpt, mistral, perplexity etc can search the web
Let’s just keep adding more and more layers like a game of telephone!
What do you mean?
Go ask chatGPT
We aren’t any a. I. We just ain’t lemmings.
I use a I as an inspiration. That’s all it is. A fancy fucking writing prompt.
You use AI for writing prompts? That’s pretty cool, a lot of people use AI for writing prompts, a lot of writers say it’s great for getting rid of writers block
And it still gets shit wrong.
google: I checked the listing of news sites to find information about a world event directly from professionals who double check their sources
chatGPT: I asked my hairstylist their uninformed opinion on a world event based on overheard conversations
I mean a moron could find the wrong information from google and your hairstylist could get lucky and be right, but odds are one source provides the opportunity for reliable results and the other is random and has a massive shit ton of downsides.
Lots of legitimate concerns and issues with AI, but if you’re going to criticize someone saying they used it you should at least understand how it works so your criticism is applicable.
It is useful. Chatgpt performs web searches, then summarizes the results in a way customized to what you asked it. It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine “is this what I was looking for?” and “how does this apply to my specific context?”
Of course it can and does still get things wrong. It’s crazy to market it as a new electronic god. But it’s not random, and it’s right the majority of the time.
It might be wrong more often than you think
Besides the other commenter highlighting the specific nature of the linked study, I will say I’m generally doing technical queries where if the answer is wrong, it’s apparent because the AI suggestion doesn’t work. Think “how do I change this setting” or “what’s wrong with the syntax in this line of code”. If I try the AI’s advice and it doesn’t work, then I ask again or try something else.
I would be more concerned about subjects where I don’t have any domain knowledge whatsoever, and not working on a specific application of knowledge, because then it could be a long while before I realize the response was wrong.
It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine “is this what I was looking for?” and “how does this apply to my specific context?”
Right: it skips the part where human intelligence and critical thinking is applied. Do you not understand how that’s a fucking problem‽
Could you try to understand what I’m saying instead of jumping down my throat?
If I want to turn off a certain type of notification in a program I’m using, I don’t need to sift through three forum threads to learn how to do that. I’m fine taking the AI route and don’t think I’ve lost my humanity.
What if your hairstylist is on the Fediverse, avoids mainstream social media, and spends a lot of their spare time reading scientific papers?
I think it’s because it causes all of Lemmy to have a collective ragegasm. It’s kind of funny in a trollish way. I support OP in this endeavour.
“I used chatgpt”
Because they know it’s not accurate and explicitly mention it so you know where this information comes from.
Then why post it at all?
Because they’d still like to know? it’s generally expected to do some research on your own before asking other people, and inform them of what you’ve already tried
AI seems to think it’s always right but in reality it is seldom correct.
Sounds like every human it’s been trained on
No, it sounds like a mindless statistics machine because that’s what it is. Even stupid people have reasons for saying and doing things.
If those people are inaccurately spouting ‘facts’ from some article they can barely remember, yeah that’s pretty much exactly the same output.
Yes, stupid people’s reason is because Trump said so, so it must be true
Asking ChatGPT isn’t research.
ChatGPT is a moderately useful tertiary source. Quoting Wikipedia isn’t research, but using Wikipedia to find primary sources and reading those is a good faith effort. Likewise, asking ChatGPT in and of itself isn’t research, but it can be a valid research aid if you use it to find relevant primary sources.
At least some editor will usually make sure Wikipedia is correct. There’s nobody ensuring chatGPT is correct.
Just using the “information” it regurgitates isn’t very useful, which is why I didn’t recommend doing that. Whether the information summarized by Wikipedia and ChatGPT is accurate really isn’t important, you use those tools to find primary sources.
I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really?
How would you phrase this differently?
“It looks like this feature was added 5 years ago.”
If asking for confirmation, just ask for confirmation.
People also say they googled, unfortunately
Not the same thing.
google allows for the possibility that the user was able to think critically about sources that a search returned
chapGPT is drunk uncle confidently stating a thing they heard third hand from Janet in accounting and then taking him at his word
Ai’s provide you with links so you can use your critical thinking
People before ChatGPT thought critically of things on Google as much as they do ChatGPT today.
People before facebook thought critically of what they saw on the news as much as they do facebook today.
Sure, people didn’t think about things too much at any point in time and sources aren’t always perfectly reliable, but some sources are worse than others,
Google results are like:
Is peertube compatible with the fediverse?
ADVERT
Introduction: A lot of people wonder if peertube works with other peertube instances…
ADVERT
What is peertube? Peertube was set up in 1989 by john Peer…
Pop-up: do you like our publication? Give us your email address.
ADVERT
Why you might want to set up peertube: peertube is a decentralised way…
ADVERT
Please support us! From £30 a month you can help us to write more.
Wat is the fediverse? The fediverse is a technology…
ADVERT
Articles you may also like:
- How to install Microsoft Teams
- How to rent servers from Amazon
- How to enable all data collection on Google
ADVERT
So can peertube instances talk to each other?
ADVERT
the answer is yes.
ADVERT
In conclusion, peertube is very…
Comments (169)
John Smith wrote at 12:28 on Friday
Peertube is actually developed by a transphobic communist who turned my daughter gay. Boycott!!!
Honest answer? It’s easy and it won’t judge you for asking stupid questions.
Edit - people are replying as if I said I do this. I’m sorry for the confusion. I don’t. This is why I see other people do it. When it comes to the general population, most people don’t care, they just want easy.
Search engines and Wikipedia don’t judge you for asking stupid questions either.
No it’ll just hallucinate shit that’ll make you look dumb when you go and state it as fact.
How are PeerTube instances funded? I’d imagine that the cost of running an instance is significantly higher than a Lemmy instance.
Depends entirely on the instance. Mine runs on the same server with a bunch of other stuff so virtually nothing.
Chatgpt is wrong BTW. But yeah its been there for a long time.
Why the fuck do people ask ChatGPT for shit like this? ChatGPT doesn’t know facts. It’s a magic 8-ball with more words.
Asking chatgpt can be super useful to get info. I just don’t understand why people don’t try to verify what it says before just re-posting like fact.
I asked chat gpt
Lol
“I asked ChatGPT” and my post got 180 replies 🔥
We used to post pictures of beans on Lemmy and get five hundred replies
We need the slapping batman meme when Robin says “I asked ChatGPT”
Doing the Lord’s work!
I try!
GrayJay also supports adding PeerTube instances:
https://pluginhost.grayjay.app/peertube?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpeertube.futo.org
I have to say I think Peertube itself is good, but the content still isn’t there yet. Of course we all know that’s because there isn’t cash to be made on Peertube
Got me thinking about how YouTubers get money. According to a quick web search, YT pays $0.01 to $0.03 per view. So if you release 10 videos a month, you made $0.10 per viewer. But Patreon memberships are typically around $5.00 a month, equivalent to $0.50 per view in the same scenario. Of course Patreon will take a cut, but it is still a lot more money.
So, if a lot of your viewers think your channel is good enough to donate to, ad money basically becomes an afterthought. In this case, the only advantage of YT over PT is discovery, i.e. the number of viewers likely to find your videos in the first place (but there’s also more competition on YT, so…)
Creators upload videos twice, once for patrons who watch them ad-free and once for people who don’t want to pay. That way, people who don’t have money to spend on YouTube can still enjoy their videos and they get a little kickback. Youtubers don’t need Peertube to release videos ad-free, so it doesn’t really change much if Patreon is more than enough.
Furthermore, the inherent privacy issues with peer to peer video consumption (I can easily track what videos you’ve been watching by simply connecting to the swarm) and the huge hosting costs a moderate sized Youtuber would inflict make the premise rather silly.
I think Peertube is great for small channels and maybe for corporate videos within an intranet, but Peertube can’t afford a moderately popular Youtuber.
So, if a lot of your viewers think your channel is good enough to donate to, ad money basically becomes an afterthought.
I don’t think this is realistic, most people will not open their wallets, especially since they can’t just go around paying a monthly subscription to everyone they watch. Even if their Patreon earnings were higher, I doubt their YouTube earnings would be insignificant.
Dead Meat starts at $1 per month not $5, they have 23,300 paid members. But their YouTube looks like it gets millions of views per month (you don’t only get views on new videos like you suggested, but old videos can get lots of views too as you build up a back catalog). And this is a channel that I found by doing a Google search for most successful YouTube Patreons.
Wow their YouTube has 2.97 billion views
Counter point: I dont want to watch content that has a monetary incentive behind it.
Why exactly do you think people create content for you to consume in the first place?
Sharing knowledge. Lots of people are not primarily motivated by greed.
of course… but plenty are. When you see kids at school saying they want to be content creators as a job you know it is only going to get worse. I never said it was right or wrong but it is exactly what it is for a large percentage of people. Also can’t get past the fact that like googling something, watching a video on youtube is literally in peoples vocabulary
I don’t want to watch the people who aspire to do it as a job. They saw some influences online who are profit driven and think they can get similarly rich. Many see it as an easy job (it’s not).
I want to watch people motivated by their thirst for creativity and sharing knowledge, and if money comes their way they will see it as secondary. I would prefer them to do something else as a job.
That’s great to aspire for but there’s still an almost total lack of content in many genres I enjoy on YouTube. I don’t even think PeerTube has progressed as far as the Lemmy community in terms of content availability. Admittedly this is probably because text and image content is much easier to create, but as a user I don’t find much reason to spend time there yet.
So if you don’t want a monetized model, there is still a need to have another solution to the lack of content, and I haven’t seen one yet.
Should teachers stop making money too?
Of course not but some may do free workshops just because they feel it may help their community.
I don’t work for free either but if my neighbor needs a new alternator or cabinet door fixed I will help/ show them how to fix it.
Most creators just ask voluntary donations for very few exclusive or temporary exclusivity
Humans love sharing new things with each other, its part of our social structure and how we ensure our own survival. Its as natural as hunger or thirst.
Plenty of people uploaded stuff to youtube for years before it started giving them any money
If ChatGPT said it was added five years ago, that means it was added anywhere between 13.8 billions years ago and never.
Wanted to say: No, according to Wikipedia global search launched in 2020.
But that actually was 5 years ago, damn.
Not my experience, still hard to me to find good quality and interesting contents on it. A problem i don’t have on pixelfed, so it’s not about the lack of algorithm
